Utterances

I'm working through the idea of speech genres because I sense they're both necessary and important--especially to my 'intentional fallacy' definition.  I'd also like to add that I'm currently very much under the influence of codeine syrup and Nyquil (super ill) so if this seems spastic it's because I've got the attention span of a peanut right now.

Recall that Bakhtin refers to 'heteroglossia' as an avenue by which to define speech genres.  He explores the notion of 'double-voiced discourse' that derives from heteroglossia and determines that it serves "the direct intention of the character who is speaking, and the refracted intention of the author" (Bakhtin 324).  Many of you may view this as irony.  That's because, in most aspects of the word, it is.

I can listen to one of my music major friends discussing tri-tones and say "Wow.  That is so interesting."  The irony being it's not.  Such is the realm of discourse.  It's what we say versus what we mean versus how they take it.  Now let's apply this to utterances.

In my children's literature lecture we discussed the idea of utterances as well.  There's the locutionary utterance which refers to what we say (the words in and of themselves).  Illocutionary refers to what we mean.  And perlocutionary explores the interpretation of the verbalized or written utterance.  I don't know how to cite this, but if anyone's interested just chat with professor Michael Adams.  Great guy.  Anyway.

In terms of speech genres this is relevant because it forms the framework from which Bakhtin's speech genre derives.  He writes of two different kinds:  primary ad secondary.

Primary is the simpler of the two.  It's the external forces of communication or "rejoinders of everyday dialogue or letters" (Bakhtin 62) that form the secondary source which are "novels, dramas, all kinds of scientific research" (62).  This is awful.  I can't remember my point.  I think I was going with--

Because the "rejoinders of everyday dialogue" make up the secondary source then the secondary source from which we read depends upon the different utterances from different people.  Recall with heteroglossia there are different kinds of speech genres.  The language of the lawyer differs from the language of the doctor which influences the primary source that creates the secondary.  This brings me to intentional fallacy.
Please see other post.